The New Leica S (Typ 007) and Leica S-E (Typ 006)

[Atina]

Again, he just said that the field where the ancient 645 film camera would have been used, Leica is now a modern solution.

[Theodoros]

For photographers to use ONE system capable for everything is a real dream case... a blessing! If I could suggest for Leica their next move, now that they invested on Sinar, it would be to try and resurrect Contax 645...
They would then add a considerable base of customers to their base, they could design new lenses for the C645 system that would be fully compatible with the S system, they could use Sinarbacks on their C645 bodies, they would "bridge" the two systems (leica & sinar) perfectly, they could have P3 upgraded to accept C645 backs, they would offer many photographers a path that maximises every penny's worth in investing on to a system...
Imagine... A DSLR, an MFDB and a view camera with only 10 lenses and 3-4 bodies... all the flexibility, all the accuracy, all the quality with just that... a dream for every photographer... a system that would be CHEAP by design... not by value!

[Theodoros]

Again, he just said that the field where the ancient 645 film camera would have been used, Leica is now a modern solution.

No... he said it would be "perfect"... as if other MF wouldn't be the same or better... 

[Atina]

No, he didn't. He explained it.

[Theodoros]

No, he didn't. He explained it.

....and I explained it further.

[RVB]

Here is what Nick Rains (www.nickrains.com, www.nickrainsimaging.com) said some time ago (I posted this before):

The quote was taken from here.

Here are his images with the Leica:

http://blog.leica-camera.com/tags/nick-rains/

Peter Karbe said the S glass can resolve 2um.. this is way more then 120mp..

"With the 6µm pixel pitch of the S2's sensor the lenses need to be able to resolve 83 lp/mm and I inquired if this was a challenge. This wasn't my first time conversing with Peter. I should have known better than to ask him a question like this. He got that "are you joking?" look on his face, grinned and said in no uncertain words that 80 lp/mm is not a problem, even at full aperture. He pointed out that the S lenses are capable of resolving 40 lp/mm at 80% contrast, wide-open, and estimated that 80 lp/mm could be resolved at about 60% contrast. So, the lenses clearly outresolve the current sensor. What about future generations? Where is the practical pixel limit for 30x45mm? Many have postulated that the next big advance in CCD sensor tech will be a 5µm pixel architecture with a close-to 100% fill rate. This would result in a 54MP sensor at 30x45mm, but with this pixel size, the lenses would need to resolve 100 lp/mm. Will the S lenses be up to the task? Again, Peter flashed his signature grin and casually said that 100 lp/mm would be no problem. In fact, he felt the S lenses could resolve around 50% contrast at this frequency. No small claim, to be sure. My mind had already moved on to the next inevitable question. What exactly is the resolution of the S glass? Peter answered that he didn't know the exact figure, but guessed that the number would be between 200-300 lp/mm. That's a big number and a whole lot of detail."

Here is the article...http://dfarkas.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/leica-s2-review-test-shooting-in.html

Rob

[TMARK]

I just don't see the relevance of suggesting that the camera is good instead of film use... Leica was wise enough to attract users of other MF in their field and now proves even wiser to attract FF users of Canon and Nikon to their field... isn't that enough?

I believe you do not understand my post.  I am talking about roles and function of a camera format, not the medium.  Here is a little history:  Up until 2004 645 cameras, shooting film, had a role in commercial photography:  Better than 35mm film but with more agility than 6x7 or 4x5.  This was perfect for fashion and lifestyle.  That 645 role was taken over by the 1ds and other 35mm sized digital cameras.  The Leica S can fill that role perfectly, as an analogue to the old 645 systems.  That's all.   I'm not arguing with you.

[TMARK]

Again, he just said that the field where the ancient 645 film camera would have been used, Leica is now a modern solution.

Thanks you.

[RVB]

Peter,37.5 is underwhelming and I would have preferred to see the exmor sensor inside..However you have a point about smaller pixel pitch,I have a friend who moved from a H4d-40 to IQ280 ,he shoots portraits and loves the 280 files but finds it harder to use,especially hand held,he has a lot less keepers with the 280,Its great for tripod work though!

best

Rob

[Theodoros]

I believe you do not understand my post.  I am talking about roles and function of a camera format, not the medium.  Here is a little history:  Up until 2004 645 cameras, shooting film, had a role in commercial photography:  Better than 35mm film but with more agility than 6x7 or 4x5.  This was perfect for fashion and lifestyle.  That 645 role was taken over by the 1ds and other 35mm sized digital cameras.  The Leica S can fill that role perfectly, as an analogue to the old 645 systems.  That's all.   I'm not arguing with you.

I'm not arguing either... my reply (clearly) has to do with why one should address all that to Leica than any other MF camera. If the reply on the Q asked was "MF can replace" rather than "Leica can replace" (which was the assumption from your quote), I would have never interfered... I only made clear that your quote is not a specific advantage of Leica... (with respect to other MF). Neither I believe that the (original) question was asking for ...film qualities (in general).

[Theodoros]

Peter,37.5 is underwhelming and I would have preferred to see the exmor sensor inside..However you have a point about smaller pixel pitch,I have a friend who moved from a H4d-40 to IQ280 ,he shoots portraits and loves the 280 files but finds it harder to use,especially hand held,he has a lot less keepers with the 280,Its great for tripod work though!

best

Rob

OTOH one may argue that 37.5 is more than plenty, that the sensor may have been less capable for High ISO if of higher resolution, that the camera might have been considerably slower, that other makers glass used on the camera (which is obviously targeted market by the camera) may not be as capable as Leica glass in resolving power... Or simply, they may have had a marketing analysis report that would have concluded in favour of the 37.5mp resolution with respect to a higher one... I believe that they will sell more cameras with the 37.5mp resolution than if it was higher... In fact I wouldn't be buying the product it was of 60 or even 50mp... I like it the way it is and I'm sure that most other buyers think the same! ...are you guys (that are suggesting more resolution) possible customers? 

I can see some considered as top wedding photographers working with this camera next summer... and perhaps some more emerging from the crowed (of wedding photographers) just because they've bought one...  ...Bravo Leica! ...very clever of you!

[RVB]

You raised some good points here,and the speed does indeed set it apart from the other Medium format camera..

The only danger of using this relatively low res is that it is pretty close to the D810 which is pretty good and very cheap in comparison.

I have an S 006 and will more than likely keep it and take the Summicron f2 before I upgrade but the live view is tempting,more than resolution the spec that bugs me is why only 125sec long exposure? and base ISO 200?

I think the real reason for this resolution is that its existing tech from the M240,I guess it will be the next Photokina before we see a really new sensor.

Rob

[craigrudlin]

Actually, I am very disappointed in the new Leica S as detailed in today's announcement.
As a professional photographer specializing in "fine art", aka landscape, urban decay, abstracts,
I typically make prints that are minimally 20x30 inches and often 40x60 inches.  While 37 MP can
often suffice,  I would prefer 50 - 60 MP (or even higher).  I am disappointed that Leica did not
increase the resolution of the sensor.

I personally have no need for 4K video in a camera designed for still photography.  If I want to shoot
video, I need a camera designed explicitly for this role.

At a minimum Leica should have released TWO models:  one with a higher resolution sensor and NO video
and another model at 37 MP WITH video.  

While I know "live view" can be useful, I seldom find it so because typically (especially with a NON articulated
LCD, such as on the new Leica) the glare simply makes it impossible to see.

Furthermore, Leica still has not improved the resolution of the LCD sufficiently to allow determination of
critical detail (focus) and remains behind  other 35 mm brands.

The increased frame rate is nice and can be useful even in landscape photography.

The higher ISO is, of course, beneficial, and appreciated, but not sufficient to warrant an "upgrade."

For the price, Leica did not even include sapphire glass, which is another disappointment.  These are not inexpensive
cameras!

I have the "original" S2.  I was anxiously awaiting the new S, anticipating upgrading.  The bad news-- I do not see
any enhancements that argue strongly for an upgrade.  The good news--  I will save a lot of money!

Disappointed, majorly.

[Theodoros]

Actually, I am very disappointed in the new Leica S as detailed in today's announcement.
As a professional photographer specializing in "fine art", aka landscape, urban decay, abstracts,
I typically make prints that are minimally 20x30 inches and often 40x60 inches.  While 37 MP can
often suffice,  I would prefer 50 - 60 MP (or even higher).  I am disappointed that Leica did not
increase the resolution of the sensor.

I personally have no need for 4K video in a camera designed for still photography.  If I want to shoot
video, I need a camera designed explicitly for this role.

At a minimum Leica should have released TWO models:  one with a higher resolution sensor and NO video
and another model at 37 MP WITH video.  

While I know "live view" can be useful, I seldom find it so because typically (especially with a NON articulated
LCD, such as on the new Leica) the glare simply makes it impossible to see.

Furthermore, Leica still has not improved the resolution of the LCD sufficiently to allow determination of
critical detail (focus) and remains behind  other 35 mm brands.

The increased frame rate is nice and can be useful even in landscape photography.

The higher ISO is, of course, beneficial, and appreciated, but not sufficient to warrant an "upgrade."

For the price, Leica did not even include sapphire glass, which is another disappointment.  These are not inexpensive
cameras!

I have the "original" S2.  I was anxiously awaiting the new S, anticipating upgrading.  The bad news-- I do not see
any enhancements that argue strongly for an upgrade.  The good news--  I will save a lot of money!

Disappointed, majorly.

Why do you need more resolution for only 40x60 inch prints?

EDIT: the camera can provide you with nearly 6x9 feet fine art prints for the resolution its sensor has...  

[RVB]

Is their anyway to use BB code's on LL?

Rob

[TMARK]

I'm not arguing either... my reply (clearly) has to do with why one should address all that to Leica than any other MF camera. If the reply on the Q asked was "MF can replace" rather than "Leica can replace" (which was the assumption from your quote), I would have never interfered... I only made clear that your quote is not a specific advantage of Leica... (with respect to other MF). Neither I believe that the (original) question was asking for ...film qualities (in general).

Abundantly clear. 

[peterv]

I think the real reason for this resolution is that its existing tech from the M240, I guess it will be the next Photokina before we see a really new sensor.

This!

The usage of the already existing M sensor to me seems to be more of a financial decision than a choice for the absolute best IQ in their flagship camera. Developing the sensor in co-operation with Cmosis required considerable investments that have to be earned back. Of course Leica marketing will say the sensor is unique, etc. and they are probaly right. And therein lies an opportunaty for Leica, maybe they can sell this new S as having a unique look because everyone else opted for the Sony sensor.

[eronald]

This!

The usage of the already existing M sensor to me seems to be more of a financial decision than a choice for the absolute best IQ in their flagship camera. Developing the sensor in co-operation with Cmosis required considerable investments that have to be earned back. Of course Leica marketing will say the sensor is unique, etc. and they are probaly right. And therein lies an opportunaty for Leica, maybe they can sell this new S as having a unique look because everyone else opted for the Sony sensor.

I think Blackmagic are using a sensor from the same family.

Edmund

[Theodoros]

This!

The usage of the already existing M sensor to me seems to be more of a financial decision than a choice for the absolute best IQ in their flagship camera. Developing the sensor in co-operation with Cmosis required considerable investments that have to be earned back. Of course Leica marketing will say the sensor is unique, etc. and they are probaly right. And therein lies an opportunaty for Leica, maybe they can sell this new S as having a unique look because everyone else opted for the Sony sensor.

ΟΤΟΗ... one may find it sensible that they started developing the sensor as an MF one... and just cropped it down to be used on an their FF camera... At least that's what they did with the CCD sensor used with the M9.... they cropped it down from an MF sensor keeping MF qualities into it (the only ones that did).  Look, Leica is NOT Nikon or Canon or P1 or Hasselblad... they are THE CREATORS of photography and they know it... The only thing they have to do is TO respect themselves, they'll never drop to a level as to explain their decisions... they just know what they are doing much better than any other... That's why they've survived Japan some 60 years ago, they've survived China or Thailand 10-20 years ago... and that's why they bought Sinar (losing money)! They just know more of photography and photographer's needs than others...  Simple as that! 

[RVB]

ΟΤΟΗ... one may find it sensible that they started developing the sensor as an MF one... and just cropped it down to be used on an their FF camera... At least that's what they did with the CCD sensor used with the M9.... they cropped it down from an MF sensor keeping MF qualities into it (the only ones that did).  Look, Leica is NOT Nikon or Canon or P1 or Hasselblad... they are THE CREATORS of photography and they know it... The only thing they have to do is TO respect themselves, they'll never drop to a level as to explain their decisions... they just know what they are doing much better than any other... That's why they've survived Japan some 60 years ago, they've survived China or Thailand 10-20 years ago... and that's why they bought Sinar (losing money)! They just know more of photography and photographer's needs than others...  Simple as that!